Readit Newsgrumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
There could be conflict of interest, but someone still needs to show that these numbers are substantially wrong.
No, the burden of proof is on the author. And considering this is a model, not a study, I wouldn't hold my breath on it.
grumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
Conspiracy BS because it cherry picks ideas to support a conclusion.
The implied conclusion is that Covid has been exaggerated to sell vaccines
Cherry picking exapmple: "criticized GAVI for focussing on funding expensive new vaccines and neglecting to give children cheap old ones" Two minutes reading the article on Wiki tells me that the purpose of the organisation is to facilitate access to new vaccines, expensive patented ones. Access to non patented cheap vaccines does not need a group like this.
Hardly worth bothering about, but the question was asked. That is why "conspiracy BS"
So, the study is funded by groups that admit to existing to sell new vaccines? And you don't see a conflict of interest?
"Apple has always had a good reputation in terms of security. But the company has been reluctant to speak publicly and candidly about specific security incidents."
All I get from this is apple probably has absolutely horrid security and just doesn't disclose incidents. A company with nothing to hide doesn't hide things
grumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
Dismayed to see this kind of conspiracy BS on HN.
What about what I said was "conspiracy bs"? These are the organizations that fund the group. They are invested in vaccine sales, and some of them have very questionable ethics. Again from Wikipedia:
"Public-sector workers and academics public health have criticized GAVI, and other global health initiatives (GHIs) with private-sector actors, saying that they have neither the democratic legitimacy nor the capacity to decide on public health agendas. Private donors often find it easier to exert influence through public-private partnerships like GAVI than through the traditional public sector. There is also criticism that staff at GHIs are often recruited directly from elite educational institutions, and have no experience in health care systems, especially those in poorer countries. Some WHO officials have privately criticized GAVI for infringing and weakening the WHO's mandates"
And that is just a small portion of the issues with that organization. GAVI is an organization that promotes sales of the industry's newest vaccines, not promoting vaccination as a whole.
"In 2012, the first MSF "The right shot" report criticized GAVI for focussing on funding expensive new vaccines and neglecting to give children cheap old ones. "Twenty percent of the world’s children aren’t even getting the basic vaccines", MSF's vaccine policy adviser said.[11] MSF criticized the Global Vaccine Action Plan (GVAP), a WHO global collaboration of which GAVI is listed as a leader, as flawed for failing to help those 20%, which is some 19 million children.[28]"
And this is just complaints against one of the organizations.
grumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
Can you explain in more detail? Who are the biased organizations who funded this publication?
From Wikipedia:
IHME receives core grant funding from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation[60] and the state of Washington. The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC); Inter-American Development Bank; Gavi, the Vaccine Alliance; the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; Kingdom of Saudi Arabia Ministry of Health; Medtronic Philanthropy; and the National Institute on Aging have also contributed funding through project grants and contracts.
Billions of dollars from organizations that have billions invested in selling vaccines
Look into the criticism of organizations such as Gavi.
grumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
Not going to keep arguing about this, but there are a huge number of different ways we can confirm that our counts are roughly accurate.
There are obvious signals in total excess death counts indicating the number of deaths due to covid, we can do retrospective random testing of early classified covid deaths.
There is no evidence of some systematic conspiracy or anything of the sort. I encourage you to consider that you might be engaging in motivated reasoning.
How can you retrospectively test the people who died prior to April? How can you confirm any of the data that was generated by guesswork?
I'm fairly sure there is no tissue available to test from any of those bodies
The situation was ripe for fraud, and there is no way to prove it didn't happen en masse. Human nature suggests it did happen. The evidence of what caused those deaths is destroyed shortly after the paperwork is filled out. The whole thing is set up in such a manner that suggests inflation of the numbers, and to have no way to counter the claims as all evidence is gone
grumpyautist commented on Estimation of total mortality due to COVID-19 healthdata.org/special-an... · Posted by u/harambae
> As well, you get the over-the-top cases where someone that dies of a gunshot is included in the covid death count[0].
? It's incredibly clear by looking at Colorado's numbers, there was no misclassification at all. Definitely mistakes have been made, but this isn't even an example of one.
Your comment is bizarre. The same case you're criticizing is from the state you go on to praise in the next sentence. These, unequivocally, have never been included in "death by covid" counts.
> financial implications for a state saying they have covid deaths
Yes, but there are also immense legal, financial, and political implications for lying about covid deaths. There is no evidence of this happening on a widespread scale.
Prior to April 2020 the diagnostic criteria for a covid death required 0 testing whatsoever. Combine that with financial incentives to record something as covid, and the lack of other income for hospitals as patients wouldn't come for minor things and elective operations were cancelled and you have a perfect storm for bad data
Deleted Comment
My first attempt building a community, feedback encouraged. I'm still working some kinks out